Considering where I work, I see a LOT of police, sherriffs, state troopers, probation officers, etc, and I know what some of the police are capable of (only what they been trained, in a lot of cases (more $$$ in the private sector), I am going to say his probation officer is both semi computer illiterate, and low on time. Otherwise, he could set up a Windows box to capture traffic going through it's shared connection, and any that is Encrypted, be considered a violation of his probation. Now that wouldn't stop things like A bootable distro Using a seperate network card, with a seperate address and internet connection etc. -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: James Sissel <jimsissel@yahoo.com>
<snip> "On a brighter note, this shows it's harder for the government to spy on you if you use Linux." </snip>
That's what they want you to think.
On Sat, 2007-08-25 at 00:00 +0000, lerninlinux@comcast.net wrote:
Considering where I work, I see a LOT of police, sherriffs, state troopers, probation officers, etc, and I know what some of the police are capable of (only what they been trained, in a lot of cases (more $$$ in the private sector), I am going to say his probation officer is both semi computer illiterate, and low on time.
Otherwise, he could set up a Windows box to capture traffic going through it's shared connection, and any that is Encrypted, be considered a violation of his probation.
Now that wouldn't stop things like A bootable distro Using a seperate network card, with a seperate address and internet connection etc.
I have to agree. If the police need to rely on software running on the box itself to keep tabs on this guy, they aren't doing a very good job of enforcing the probation to begin with. Making the guy shift to an OS he doesn't want to use is only going to increase his motivation for bypassing the checks that have been put in place. It just seems to be another case of laziness due to monoculture. --Jestin
participants (2)
-
Jestin Stoffel -
lerninlinux＠comcast.net